The overwhelming majority of scientists today believe the universe started with the ‘big bang’. Central to the big bang theory is the ‘singularity’.

Amazingly, this singularity is, as I understand their argument, a point in which all the universe before the big bang existed, only it didn’t really exist because the singularity existed as nothingness. There was nothing before the big bang.

So the whole universe sprang from nothingness! Everything that exist today came from nothing.

And they scoff at me because I believe in God, because I can’t see Him!

The sponsor of the bill, State Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, R-Southlake, told the Texas Tribune, “For us to have our own gold, a lot of the runs on the bank and those types of things, they happen because people are worried that there’s nothing there to back it up.”

Bank runs were the great fear in the Mediterranean-island country of Cyprus today, as banks reopened for the first time since March 16, while the European Union imposed unprecedented austerity measures on the nation, including confiscating money in bank accounts. WND reported on March 18 the concerns that the crisis could spread to the U.S. financial system.

Capriglione said his bill is, “not about putting Texas on its own gold standard, [but instead will] give the state a reputation as being more financially secure in the event of a national or international financial crisis.”

“If we own it,” Perry told Glenn Beck last week, “I will suggest to you that that’s not someone else’s determination whether we can take possession of it back or not.”

Capriglione’s bill would establish the Texas Bullion Depository to hold the gold.

“We don’t want just the certificates. We want our gold. And if you’re the state of Texas, you should be able to get your gold,” said Capriglione.

However, he concedes transporting $1 billion worth of gold bars would be impractical, so he suggests selling the gold and repurchasing it in Texas.

The bill might get bipartisan support. State Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, called the bill “an interesting concept” and wants to consult financial experts on its merits.

That bipartisan support may stem from the severity of the crisis in Europe and fears it could spread here.

Cyprus fell into turmoil while the government and European financial leaders hammered out a $13 billion emergency assistance package to keep the nation’s banks from collapsing.

Cypriots were outraged and took to the streets to protest an unprecedented plan to impose a confiscatory tax on all bank accounts.

Depositors with more than 100,000 euros, or about $130,000, would get 9.9 percent immediately deducted from their accounts. Smaller deposits would suffer a deduction of 6.75 percent.

Following the protests, the plan to confiscate money from the smaller accounts was rejected by Cyprus’ parliament.

The European Union said in a statement today the restrictions on access to money will be lifted as soon as possible.

The heavily indebted government of Cyprus is still planning to raise as much as $8.3 billion with its “one-time” tax on bank accounts of more than 100,000 euros, to satisfy the bailout demands of the EU.

The Cyprus crisis has sparked a surge in an alternative currency that exists only in cyberspace.

The trading value of a digital cash called “bitcoins” has soared, increasing by 20 percent on one U.S. currency exchange in just the last week.

“Incremental demand for bitcoin is coming from the geographic areas most affected by the Cypriot financial crisis – individuals in countries like Greece or Spain, worried that they will be next to feel the threat of deposit taxes,” said Nicholas Colas, chief market strategist at ConvergEx.

“This is a clear sign that people are looking for alternative ways to get their money out of the country,” said Christopher Vecchio, currency analyst at DailyFX.

Even though some economists say Cyprus is a special case and the “contagion” of taxing bank accounts is unlikely to spread, until now bank accounts worldwide, no matter how dire the government’s financial woes, have been held sacrosanct.

Now the government in at least one nation is poised to simply take money out of depositors’ accounts. That’s a first.

Could it happen in the U.S.?

Some experts say probably not – at least not in the same way as in Cyprus.

Economist, speaker and author Jerry Robinson, who runs Follow the Money Daily and is a featured columnist at WND, assessed the crisis in Cyprus.

“It has a lot to do with politics, Angela Merkel’s reelection bid and also a few others trying to stay in power,” he said.

Robinson said it’s interesting to observe that such powers are playing tough with a tiny nation like Cyprus, while bigger nations with worse economies, such as Italy and Spain, have not been attacked in the same way.

But he said the plans are drastic.

“This is nuclear war on the banking [industry],” Robinson observed.

Some analysts point out that in the U.S., government is already “taxing” Americans’ bank accounts by other, less obvious and more long-term means than the naked cash-grab playing out in Cyprus.

For instance, interest rates in the U.S. are near zero, so depositors are not getting paid for the use of their funds, effectively “loaning” their hard-earned money to banks. Then, thanks to inflation, their deposits become worth progressively less and less.

The real-world inflation rate – as measured by the actual rise in prices of essentials, including food and fuel – is far higher in the U.S. than the official 2 percent. But even using the 2 percent figure, over the next few years the buying power of American depositors’ bank accounts will be just as diminished as that of Cyprus bank-account holders.

But this new and unsettling form of “tax” is not the only concern. The immediate concern for many is that the crisis in Cyprus will spread, causing bank runs in other troubled European Union countries such as Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal. A European financial crisis of that magnitude would undoubtedly hurt the U.S. economy.

Most American depositors take comfort in the fact that their savings accounts in banks and credit unions are federally guaranteed up $250,000. However, those government funds are designed to bail out very infrequent bank failures. They in no way could cover all depositors’ accounts in the case of a widespread run on U.S. banks, as is occurring now in Cyprus.

Respected hard-money proponent James Turk says bank runs in Europe are a wake-up call to all bank depositors around the world.

“Bank insurance means nothing these days when bureaucrats and politicians are looking for wealth to grab,” Turk said.

“To me this proposed bailout is outright theft, and theft cannot be justified, but the central planners are trying to do that anyway,” he added.

“The events in Cyprus are obviously a scary message that the Greeks, Spaniards, Italians and others are taking seriously, because they see that their money in the bank is at risk, too. But the less obvious message is that all money in banks is at risk. Not only are bank assets impaired, but all the banks are interlinked because they lend to one another and own a lot of debt of insolvent countries,” concluded Turk.

Cyprus is particularly vulnerable to instability in the banking sector. The country’s banking assets are about eight times the size of the economy. And foreign investors hold almost half of the 70 billion euros deposited in Cyprus. Moody’s estimates $19 billion of those deposits are owned by Russian corporations. Many suspect the Russian mafia uses banks in Cyprus to launder money.

When the Cyrpus crisis erupted, the U.S. Treasury Department issued a statement, reading, “The Treasury Department is monitoring the situation in Cyprus closely, and Secretary Jacob Lew has been speaking with his European counterparts. It is important that Cyprus and its euro-area partners work to resolve the situation in a way that is responsible and fair and ensures financial stability.”"

But the damage may be already done to confidence in the European banking system. This is the first time a national bailout has proposed to impose losses on bank depositors. Some call that a dangerous precedent.

Opulence on a scale never seen before in a democratic republic, the Obama’s regal reign!

Why aren’t people outraged? Is it because he’s black? Has white guilt so paralyzed whites that whites dare not raise concerns?

But what about blacks, surely they can see the hypocrisy of the the talk measured against the walk. Do they think the black president deserves it because of a perceived grievance against whites who are perceived as having an unfair advantage historically in the nation?

Or is it that the media hasn’t shined the spotlight on the issue and they just don’t know about the vacations, golfing episodes, celebrity elbow rubbing, because blacks don’t read Drudge or listen to Rush?

We're worse than broke and the Obama’s are living a life even the British and Saudi royals would envy!

The First Family has been criticized in recent days for taking frequent vacations. Earlier this week, Breitbart News broke the story that the Obama daughters spent part of Spring Break at the Atlantis resort on Paradise Island in the Bahamas. Michelle Obama and the First Daughters took a separate ski trip last month to Aspen, Colorado.

UPDATE: The White House has confirmed the report was removed on their request. From Kristina Schake, Communications Director to the First Lady:

From the beginning of the administration, the White House has asked news outlets not to report on or photograph the Obama children when they are not with their parents and there is no vital news interest. We have reminded outlets of this request in order to protect the privacy and security of these girls.

Alexander Marlow is Managing Editor of Breitbart News. Follow him on twitter @alexmarlow.

You think he'd still be an editor and contributor to this website if the word "black" appeared throughout this piece instead of "white" and the picture in question was a bunch of African-American Bulls fans celebrating last night's victory in Chicago?

For those unfamiliar with SB Nation, short for Sports Blog Nation, Wikipedia describes it as "a sports network owned and operated by Vox Media with more than 300 separate web sites maintained primarily by part-time contract writers. They put together posts, facilitate dialogue and interact with commenters."

In December 2010, Beet.tv reported the website was getting 100 million monthly views. As such, this is a big player in online sports reporting.

Makes you wonder why management tolerates racism.

*****Update: Twitter's @ed smartly points out the lack of diversity at one of the other websites Hanstock writes for. Hanstock and his co-workers don't look very different from the Chicago fans he mocked.

(HT NB reader Jim Thompson)

About the Author

Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Click here to follow Noel Sheppard on Twitter.

There is no little island nation for the international banking system aka Luciferian Rothschild/Rockefeller bankster cabal! Cyprus is part of the international banking system just like the US. What they did there they will do here, it’s just a matter of time. Cyprus is the canary!

The international bankers just stole 40% of the wealth of the rich in Cyprus. What effect do you think that has on the ‘not rich’? Like it or not, the rich fund, employ, pay taxes for, etc., etc., etc., the not rich.

Their crime is that they are not in the cabal, not part of the super rich. They may have danced with, ingratiated themselves to, played the political correct game with, but are not in with the in crowd…and will never be. The cabal will make sure of that! They are excluded from the exclusive NWO crowd.

1:28 PM PDT 3/27/2013 by Paul Bond

Funny or Die

UPDATED: An eBay user who was selling an autographed photo of the actor and promising to buy a gun with the money sparked a mini-trend, though the auction site appears to have put an end to the movement.

A clever eBay user started a trend: selling Jim Carrey paraphernalia by advertising that proceeds for the sale will be used to purchase a gun.

started when an eBay user going by the name of “astrobuzz” listed a “Jim Carrey Autographed 8X10 Photo So I Can Afford a Gun!”

The listing, explained the user, was in response to Carrey’s Funny or Die video in which he disparages gun owners, Second Amendment advocates and deceased Oscar winning-actor Charlton Heston, who once headed the NRA.

The item for sale is a black-and-white photo of Carrey with the inscription, “Spank you very much!” and is an autographed reprint. While identical items on eBay sell for about $8 and rarely attract more than a couple of bids, astrobuzz had attracted a hefty 103 bidders who by Wednesday afternoon had driven the price up to $860.

Then, the item's description suddenly changed late Wednesday, and the bids disappeared. The seller's detailed description of his reason for wanting to sell the item was gone, including all references to the gun he wants to purchase.

As of late Wednesday, the description for the Carrey photo being sold by astrobuzz read: "I'm selling this Jim Carrey autographed B&W photo (mint condition) for purposes I cannot explain because it might be against eBay's Terms & Conditions."

The response to the original listing, not surprisingly, had attracted copycats. User “paradisecarwash,” for example, had posted the same item with a similar description and had garnered a $50 bid, and “Morpheus _2080" went the extra mile: For a minimum $50 bid, an eBayer could buy the photo plus a Dumb and Dumber DVD, and he even posted a photo of the gun he wants to buy.

Some eBayers were promising to join the NRA with money they get for their Carrey collectibles, and some promised to pursue classes and apply for a concealed-carry permit.

But late Wednesday, the word "gun" had been stripped from the descriptions of all of the Carrey items listed at eBay.

As for astrobuzz, he (or she) had become a bit of an eBay sensation among gun enthusiasts, who turned the “Questions from other members” section at the bottom of his listing into a bulletin board of political commentary.

“In the hopes Carrey will see this: I will NOT be seeing KICK-ASS 2 when it is released,” one person wrote. “I would just like to encourage the winning bidder in this noble cause to bring the prize to the range for proper disposal,” wrote another.

All of the comments, though, also disappeared late Wednesday.

Kick-Ass 2 opens Aug. 16, and there is evidence that more than 40 percent of conservative moviegoers will shun a film for political purposes.

Carrey sparked huge controversy with his Funny or Die video, as well as a series of tweets, one in which he calls those who are against more gun control “motherf---ers.”

Wednesday, March 27, 2013

Supporters of the 380 sheriffs in 15 states who so far have vowed to defy new state and federal gun control laws claim that legislation is starting to pop up around the nation to fire any state elected or appointed law enforcement official who doesn't obey federal orders.

The first effort emerged in Texas. Legislation proposed by Dallas Democratic Rep. Yvonne Davis would remove any sheriff or law enforcement officer who refuses to enforce state or federal laws.

What's more, it would remove any elected or appointed law enforcement officer for simply stating or signing any document stating that they will not obey federal orders.

A gun lobbyist told Secrets, "Beware because once something like this is introduced in one state, it will be followed very quickly in several other states."

Secrets has charted the growing group of sheriffs opposed to new gun control initiatives. They argue that citizens should be allowed by buy the types of weapons they want to defend themselves. They also claim that there is no way to tell the difference between old rifle and pistol magazines and new ones that President Obama wants to ban.

They told us: Premiums will go down, implied government healthcare meant government provides healthcare (this was to fool the idiots), you can keep your current policy, you can keep your current doctor, won’t add to the debt…

Obamacare will be much better, fairer…

Low information voters (idiots mentioned above) believed their lies, the media knew they were lies but said nothing then…

Steve Watson Infowars.com Mar 25, 2013

Footage of hundreds of armored trucks, similar to ones reportedly purchased recently by the Department Of Homeland Security has appeared online, raising more questions over their intended use.

The video was uploaded to YouTube last week by a user who stated that it was shot in the middle of the desert between Hackberry and Peach Springs, Arizona.

It shows hundreds of military style trucks loaded on to a train, presumably in the process of being delivered domestically for law enforcement or military purposes.

The video raises significant questions in the wake of reports that the Department of Homeland Security, headed by Janet Napolitano, recently purchased around 2,700 MRAP trucks that many believe are to be deployed to local law enforcement agencies around the country.

It is clear that the DHS does have fleets of armoured vehicles intended for use in the US.

Here is a demonstration video of such a vehicle by ICE agents:

Does the latest video show these same type of trucks in the process of being delivered?

The footage is the latest in a spate of similar videos to surface on the internet in recent months showing huge amounts of military equipment packed onto trains en route within the US.

Such stark activity with little to no background detail has prompted several Congressmen to ask the federal government for an explanation. According to some elected representatives, the DHS has refused to answer specific questions on the purchases, stating only that the ammunition is for “training purposes” over the next five years, and has been bulk ordered to save money.

As we have pointed out numerous times however, military experts have noted that hollow point bullets are unsuitable for training, and are much more expensive than full metal jackets.

Efforts by government media mouthpieces to dismiss the story have only caused it to become more viral.

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

Sasha and Malia Obama are quietly vacationing at the Atlantis resort on Paradise Island in the Bahamas, Breitbart News has learned.

A source tipped Breitbart News off to the First Daughters’ spring vacation, which was not publicly announced or reported.

Breitbart subsequently confirmed President Barack Obama’s daughters’ trip with other sources. Both the White House and the Atlantis resort declined to confirm the report or comment, but another guest provided a photograph of Sasha and Malia at the resort.

Social media, including Twitter and Facebook, have also carried reports of the First Daughters' presence at Atlantis. One person who is at the resort wrote: “Rumor confirmed: friends saw the first daughters with a gaggle of friends being escorted to the held elevator.”

Via Twitter, another person wrote: “Obama daughters at the same restaurant as me...in the bahamas.”

A third tweeted that she was excited to see Sasha and Malia at Club Crush, the Bahamian resort’s nightclub for teenagers: “OBAMA'S DAUGHTERS SMILED AND WAVED AT ME. I WAS IN THE SAME ROOM AS OBAMA'S DAUGHTERS.”

Atlantis describes Club Crush as the “ultimate nightclub for teens ages 13 to 17 and tweens ages 9 to 13 vacationing on Paradise Island.”

Another hotel guest tweeted a photograph of what she said was the motorcade for "the Obama crew":

It is unclear at this time if first lady Michelle Obama is also at the resort, or if she is planning to join her daughters there.

Atlantis spokeswoman Megan Marchesini told Breitbart News that “our company policy is to never comment on guests.” Secret Service spokesman Bryan Leary told Breitbart News that the Secret Service does not confirm or deny trips for anyone under the agency’s protective detail, including Sasha and Malia.

Sasha and Malia both attend Sidwell Friends School, which is currently on its spring break. That break continues through Friday. It is unclear how long the first daughters will be staying in the Bahamas, or what the cost will be to taxpayers.

Earlier this month, the White House canceled public tours as a result of the recent budget sequester, citing Secret Service staffing costs.

According to Judicial Watch, Malia Obama's trip to Mexico last spring break, during which she was apparently accompanied by Secret Service protection, cost taxpayers $115,500.87. Sasha did not accompany Malia on that trip.

They’ve purchased enough ammo for a 20 year war, much of it hollow point which is much too expensive for training purposes. The military doesn’t even use hollow point ammo for training

Arms build-up continues as Congress demands answers

Paul Joseph Watson Infowars.com March 25, 2013

While the Department of Homeland Security continues to ignore members of Congress demanding to know why the federal agency is engaged in an apparent arms build-up, the DHS has just announced it plans to purchase another 360,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition to add to the roughly 2 billion bullets already bought over the past year.

The DHS has now purchased over 2 billion rounds of ammo.

A solicitation on the Federal Business Opportunities website details the DHS’ plan to purchase 360,000 rounds of “Commercial leaded training ammo (CLTA) Pistol .40 caliber 165 grain, jacketed hollow point.” The bullets are to be delivered to the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Artesia, New Mexico, the same destination for 240,000 hollow point rounds which were purchased only last month.

Although the DHS has attempted to explain its mammoth purchase of ammunition by claiming the bullets are being acquired in bulk to save money and that they are for training purposes only, this has been disputed by reputable voices such as former Marine Richard Mason, who told reporters with WHPTV News in Pennsylvania earlier this month, “We never trained with hollow points, we didn’t even see hollow points my entire four and a half years in the Marine Corps.”

Hollow point bullets are almost twice as expensive as full metal jackets, therefore the DHS’ explanation that it is buying huge quantities in bulk to “save money” doesn’t make sense.

As we reported yesterday, concerns about the apparent arms build-up are growing, with retired United States Army Captain Terry M. Hestilow sending a letter to Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) warning that the ammo purchases represent “a bold threat of war by that agency (DHS), and the Obama administration, against the citizens of the United States of America.”

Questions from members of Congress about why the federal agency is buying up ammo, exacerbating shortages across the country, have been met with silence.

- Kansas Congressman Timothy Huelscamp said last week that threats should be made to withdraw funding from the DHS if it didn’t explain why it was purchasing so many bullets, remarking, “They have no answer for that question. They refuse to answer to answer that.”

- Californian Congressman Doug LaMalfa and 14 of his House colleagues have written a letter to the Department of Homeland Security asking if the purchases are, “being conducted in a manner that strategically denies the American people access to ammunition.”

Although members of Congress are treating the matter with the seriousness it deserves, the mainstream and leftist media have attempted to ridicule the entire issue as a conspiracy theory, with Atlantic Wire even suggesting that the story had its origins in a debunked email, a report that completely failed to even mention the admitted fact that the DHS had purchased around 2 billion bullets.

While the DHS continues to purchase bullets in large quantities, police departments have been forced to barter amongst each other in a desperate scramble to meet their ammo needs.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

The leaders of the GOP are not much different from Democrats. In fact, in the broad plan for the direction of the country, and the world, they are no different.

They are traitors to the Republic, they are working towards the new world order and in doing so are working against America.

The difference in the 2 parties can be described this way, Democrats are wolves in wolves clothing while Republicans are wolves in sheep’s clothing.

The Bush administration was perhaps the most insidious in the history of the Republic. Wearing a conservative Christian mask under Bush II they greatly expanded government, exploded spending, stole our rights, and instigated the financial collapse and the subsequent bailouts, the greatest theft in human history.

Not to mention getting us into a never ending war against an enemy they can define any way they decide and any where they decide!

Why would a ‘conservative’ Chief Justice, one John Roberts, come up with a ridiculous way to rule against a challenge to the constitutionality of Obamacare. Because he is not what he seems to be. I predicted that if Justice Kennedy went with the conservatives he would side with the liberals.

“I have no idea of the validity of the information in this article but if true, Roberts is hoping Kennedy will side with the liberals on Obamacare so he doesn’t have to.

If it’s upheld 5-4 with Roberts being the swing vote then this information seems a whole lot more plausible!”

Roberts had to pay his dues, Roberts was appointed by Bush II, the son of NWO Bush I, son of NAZI conspirator Prescott Bush, so is it a big surprise that Roberts is owned by the R&R Luciferian bankster cartel, the New World Order elites?

Although he was the junior member of the Supreme Court, Bush made him Chief Justice…we’ve been screwed again!

The left / right paradigm is the matrix! The R&R Luciferian bankster cartel controls them both!

So, it’s not a surprise that Rove and his fellows lean more and more left!

Friday, March 22, 2013

A pair of teenagers was arrested Friday and accused of fatally shooting a 13-month-old baby in the face and wounding his mother during their morning stroll through a leafy, historic neighborhood in southeast Georgia.

Sherry West had just been to the post office a few blocks from her apartment Thursday morning and was pushing her son, Antonio, in his stroller as they walked past gnarled oak trees and blooming azaleas in the coastal city of Brunswick.

West said a tall, skinny teenager, accompanied by a smaller boy, asked her for money.

"He asked me for money and I said I didn't have it," she told The Associated Press Friday from her apartment, which was scattered with her son's toys and movies.

"When you have a baby, you spend all your money on babies. They're expensive. And he kept asking and I just said `I don't have it.' And he said, `Do you want me to kill your baby?' And I said, `No, don't kill my baby!'"

Authorities said one of the teens fired four shots, grazing West's ear and striking her in the leg, before he walked around to the stroller and shot the baby in the face.

Seventeen-year-old De'Marquis Elkins is charged as an adult with first-degree murder, along with a 14-year-old who was not identified because he is a juvenile, Police Chief Tobe Green said. It wasn't immediately clear whether the boys had attorneys.

Police announced the arrest Friday afternoon after combing school records and canvassing neighborhoods searching for the pair. The chief said the motive of the "horrendous act" was still under investigation and the weapon had not been found.

"I feel glad that justice will be served," West said. "It's not something I'm going to live with very well. I'm just glad they caught him."

West said detectives showed her photographs of about 24 young men. She pointed to one, saying he looked like the gunman.

"After I picked him, they said they had him in custody," West said. "It looked just like him. So I think we got our man."

West said she thought the other suspect looked much younger: "That little boy did not look 14."

The slaying happened around the corner from West's apartment in the city's Old Town historic district. It's a street lined with grand Victorian homes from the late 1800s. Most have been neatly restored by their owners. Others, with faded and flaking paint, have been divided into rental units like the apartment West shared with her son. The slain boy's father, Luis Santiago, lives in a house across the street.

A neighbor dropped off a fruit basket and then a hot pot of coffee Friday as a friend from the post office dropped by to comfort West.

Santiago came and went. At one point he scooped up an armload of his son's stuffed animals, saying he wanted to take them home with him. He talked about Antonio's first birthday on Feb. 5 and how they had tried different party hats on the boy.

West said her son was walking well on his own and eight of his teeth had come in. But she also mourned the milestones that will never come, like Antonio's first day at school.

"I'm always going to wonder what his first word would be," West said.

Beverly Anderson, whose husband owns the property where West has lived for several years, said she was stunned by the violence in what's generally known as a safe neighborhood where children walk to school and families are frequently outdoors.

Jonathan Mayes and his wife were out walking their dogs Friday, right past the crime scene, and said they've never felt nervous about being out after dark.

"What is so mind-numbing about this is we don't have this kind of stuff happen here," Mayes said. "You expect that kind of crap in Atlanta."

It's not the mother's first loss of a child to violence. West said her 18-year-old son, Shaun Glassey, was killed in New Jersey in 2008. She still has a newspaper clipping from the time.

Glassey was killed with a steak knife in March 2008 during an attack involving several other teens on a dark street corner in Gloucester County, N.J., according to news reports from the time.

"He and some other boys were going to ambush a kid," Bernie Weisenfeld, a spokesman for the Gloucester County prosecutor's office, told the AP Friday.

Glassey was armed with a knife, but the 17-year-old target of the attack was able to get the knife away from him "and Glassey ended up on the wrong end of the knife," Weisenfeld recalled.

Prosecutors decided the 17-year-old would not be charged because they determined that he acted in self-defense.

Sabrina Elkins, the sister of the older suspect in the baby's slaying, said Friday evening that she believed her brother was innocent of the charges. She didn't know whether he had a lawyer.

"He couldn't have done that to a little baby," she told AP. "My brother has a good heart."

She said that her brother had been living in Atlanta, and only returned to Brunswick a few months ago. Typically, he would come by her house in the morning and they'd go to breakfast. But yesterday morning, police came to her door.

Her brother was walking down the sidewalk and saw the officers at her door but came over anyway, Sabrina Elkins said.

"The police came pointing a Taser at him, telling him to get on the ground," she recalled by phone. "He said, `What are you getting me for? Can you tell me what I did?'"

The documentation for this contract is not as detailed as the London one, so the cost per room is not available. However, just like his London hotel, the Hotel Intercontinental Paris Le Grand is a five star hotel. Again, security concerns prevent these type of contracts from being open to bidding, but if the government was able to do some comparison shopping, the Hotel Intercontinental has a special offer, "Find a lower price elsewhere and your first night is free." The Vice President stayed in Paris for one night.

More insanity, the professor is the one who should have been suspended!

I dare him to assign them an exercise in which they step on Mohammed. He wouldn’t do it for 2 reasons, he wouldn’t want to offend Muslims and he would fear for his life from the Muslims!

Although he has nothing to fear as far as being killed by Christians he doesn’t care that Christians are offended!

There is a war against Christians both here and abroad but just think of the fact that the leaders in the nation especially founded on Christian principles are trying to erase Christianity from it’s midst!

(Source:FAU) FAU Boca Raton campus

BOCA RATON (CBS4) – A student at Florida Atlantic University said he was unfairly suspended from his Intercultural Communications class because he refused to step on Jesus.

Ryan Rotella, a junior from Coral Springs, said the incident began when his professor, Dr. Deandre Poole, asked students in the class to write the word “Jesus” on a piece of paper, fold it up, and step on it.

Rotella, a deeply religious Mormon, told CBS12 that he was offended and refused to participate in the exercise.

“Anytime you stomp on something it shows that you believe that something has no value. So if you were to stomp on the word Jesus, it says that the word has no value,” said Rotella.

Rotella said he voiced his concerns to his teacher’s supervisor and later learned he was suspended from the class.

FAU said Dr. Poole was conducting a classroom exercise from a textbook entitled “Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach, 5th Edition” and released this statement to CBS12: ”Faculty and students at academic institutions pursue knowledge and engage in open discourse. While at times the topics discussed may be sensitive, a university environment is a venue for such dialogue and debate.”

The school has not commented whether the professor would face any disciplinary action.

The ‘feral’ government continues tearing down our 2nd Amendment rights piecemeal like the old ‘Camel’s nose in the tent’ parable, first the nose, then a hoof, until he’s all the way in.

Another ploy at work is the ‘start with asking for a dollar, then back it down to a dime’ approach. There is such relief that the demand is now much less than at the first that it becomes acceptable. The result is the same, the loss of our rights. It’s not ‘right’ whether it’s all at once or a little at a time!

Another thing it does is give cover to the Republican stealth NWO types, they can keep their true agenda obscured by accepting the lesser of two evils instead of giving themselves away by supporting the full liberal position.

I used the phrase ‘Republican stealth NWO types’ instead of RINO’s because there is a difference. RINO’s are apparent, you know who they are, the McCain’s, Lindsey Graham’s, but the stealth NWO types aren’t’. They are the Gingrich’s, Issa’s, Buckley Jr.’s, Chief Justice John Roberts’ types. People you would not readily suspect.

These are people of exceptional intelligence and abilities who were selected, because of their exceptionalism, to infiltrate, in this case politics, and subtly influence their colleagues towards the goals of the NWO elites aka Luciferian Rothschild/Rockefeller bankster cabal.

Democrats who vowed a crackdown on guns after the horrific Newtown, Conn., school shooting are touting prospects for Senate passage of expanded federal background checks, even as they acknowledge there isn't enough support to restore a ban on assault-style weapons.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday that a measure likely to be debated in his chamber next month will include tougher laws and stiffer sentences for gun trafficking and increased school safety grants.

Closing background check loopholes will be the core of the legislation, just as it was the cornerstone of President Barack Obama's proposals for stemming gun violence following the December slayings of 20 first-graders and six staffers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

Including expanded checks in the gun legislation signals that Democrats feel they can win bipartisan support for the measure or are happy to dare Republicans to reject the entire gun-control package and face political consequences in next year's elections.

Have you read about Illinois in the news lately? Last Tuesday, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged the fiscally irresponsible state government for misleading bond investors about the health of its public pension system. The Land of Lincoln’s elected officials have been piling up mountains of pension debt for years and refusing to pay it off. In fact, Illinois currently owes $192 billion in unfunded pension liabilities over the past few decades thanks to its legislature’s long history of shortchanging pension payments.

While the spendthrift politicians were caught this time around, it’s not the only trick they have up their sleeve. Governor Pat Quinn has been rubbing elbows with the Obama Administration in an effort to secure a federal bailout. Just last year in his state budget, the governor wrote “significant long-term improvements will come only from … seeking a federal guarantee of the debt.” That’s right, Illinois’s officials are scheming to shift their self-incurred debts onto the backs of taxpayers like you.

Sadly, Illinois is just one of many states that may be interested in swindling federal taxpayers. Other states like California and New York have also nearly bankrupted their public pensions and may be looking for a bailout courtesy of Uncle Sam.

Fortunately, some fiscally responsible statesmen from the unlikeliest places are taking a stand against this thievery before it takes place. Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois is poised to reintroduce his No States Bailouts Resolution, requiring states as sovereign entities to retain responsibility for the debts they have racked up.

God help us, I forgot, we banned Him from our schools!

Organizers of the University of Tennessee’s first-ever “Sex Week” will have to find a new source of funding after embattled university officials reversed course and announced they will not fund the controversial program with state tax dollars.

“We support the process and the students involved, but we should not use state funds in this manner,” Chancellor Jimmy Cheek said in a statement.

Cheek made the announcement after reviewing “Sex Week’s” final agenda. As a result, the student-led event will be forced to find $11,145 in additional funding. The university will continue to let the group use $6,700 in student fees.

UT System President Joe DiPietro said he supports the decision.

“The University is accountable to the General Assembly, the governor and the people of Tennessee for the use of state tax dollars,” DiPietro said. “The University’s three-part mission is to provide education, research and public service, and the state allocates this funding to help us fulfill the mission. Some activities planned as part of Sex Week are not an appropriate use of state tax dollars.”

The university’s turn-about came as Tennessee’s governor and a host of lawmakers voiced their public opposition. Several lawmakers had already announced plans to defund the university unless they defunded “Sex Week.”

A spokesman for Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam told Fox News that based on the information they had, “we believe this is an inappropriate use of university funds.”

Sex Weekis scheduled for April 7-12 and includes 30 events including “Getting Laid,” “Sex Positivity; Queer as a Verb,” “Bow Chicka Bow Woah,” “How to talk to Your Parents About Sex,” “Loud and Queer,” and “How Many Licks Does it Take…” – a workshop about oral sex.

“We should be teaching these children what is important to learn so they can get jobs,” state Sen. Stacey Campfield told Fox News. “I don’t know what jobs they plan on getting if they’re having seminars on oral sex and bondage. I don’t see how that will help someone in their professional career – unless they plan on becoming a porn star.”

The university had allocated nearly $20,000 to fund the week-long salute to sex that also included a poetry-reading lesbian bondage expert and a campus-wide scavenger hunt for a golden condom.

“This is truly an offense to the people of Tennessee,” state Rep. Susan Lynn said on the House floor. “I am offended for the people of my district at the University of Tennessee having sex week.”

Sinclair Sexsmith – noted lesbian bondage and leather expert

Sen. Campfield told Fox News he is beyond outraged and called the event “completely ridiculous.”

“They’ve been trying to say it’s about safety and birth control,” he said. “These kids are supposed to be some of the smartest kids out there – and they don’t know where to buy condoms? If they can’t figure out where to buy condoms, I question whether they need to be in college in the first place – if they’re that stupid.”

Campfield has summoned university officials to the state capitol to explain why they signed off on the event.

“The university always cries poor-mouth, that they don’t have any money and yet they seem to have plenty of money to do this kind of stuff,” he said. “We’re going to try and hold their budget until it gets squared away.”

The content of sex week prompted Rep. Bill Dunn to express his outrage on the House floor.

“It’s debauchery,” he told Fox News. “They are treating sex in such a frivolous manner.”

Dunn, who graduated from the University of Tennessee, said he’s been overwhelmed with phone calls from angry citizens.

“I don’t think they approve of the university using their resources to push forth a hook-up agenda,” he said.

Dunn said he’s been in touch with university officials who told him they’ve already launched an internal inquiry into who ultimately gave the thumbs up for the event.

“There’s going to be an investigation as to whose thumb was up,” he said. “I’m not sure the president of the university was aware of what happened.”

Campfield said the inmates are running the asylum.

“They say it’s all about diversity,” he told Fox News. “Well, perversity does not make diversity just because it’s at the university.”

Obama epitomizes a word from the title of one of the books Bill Ayers wrote for him, to wit, ‘audacity’ from The Audacity of Hope.

He is audacious not because of anything intrinsic to him but because he is the ‘Chosen One’. And as such anything he does will be backed by those who chose him. He can’t lose.

He knows the media, academia, Hollywood, both parties of congress, the Supreme Court, etc., etc., etc., all have his back. Oh, let’s not forget Lucifer!

No one in history could have escaped the scrutiny for the things he’s done in his private life, or his political life…he is the consummate ‘untouchable’.

And certainly, this has been conferred upon his cabinet members, they operate with virtual impunity! Who is going to stop them, Boehner, the ‘cave’man, McConnell, the ‘invisible’ man…they have been mostly invisible while Obama has raped and pillaged the constitution.

You know who they are by what they have failed to do! They are the most powerful men of the opposition party. What opposition!!!

Steve Watson Infowars.com Mar 21, 2013

Speaking at CPAC with Infowars and We Are Change reporter, Luke Rudkowski, Congressman Timothy Huelscamp revealed this week that the Department of Homeland Security has refused to answer questions from “multiple” members of Congress regarding its recent purchase of huge amounts of weapons and ammunition.

“They have no answer for that question. They refuse to answer to answer that,” Huelscamp said.

“I’ve got a list of various questions of agencies about multiple things. Far from being the most transparent administration in the world, they are the most closed and opaque,” the Congressman added.

“They refuse to let us know what is going on, so I don’t really have an answer for that. Multiple members of Congress are asking those questions,” he added.

“It comes down to during the budget process, during the appropriations process, are we willing to hold DHS’s feet to the fire?”

“We’re going to find out… I say we don’t fund them ’til we get an answer. Those type of things really challenge Americans. They are worried about this administration,” Huelscamp urged.

Watch the clip below:

The Congressman’s comments come in the wake of a demand for answers from New Jersey Congressman Leonard Lance on the same subject.

“I would like a full explanation as to why that has been done and I have every confidence that the oversight committee ….should ask those questions,” said Lance, adding that he shared a belief, “that Congress has a responsibility to ask Secretary Napolitano as to exactly why these purchases have occurred.”

The DHS has purchased over 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition over the past year – enough to wage a 20 year plus war. Earlier this month, Forbes Magazine called for a “national conversation” on the matter.

During the CPAC interview, Congressman Huelscamp also spoke briefly about why he voted twice against the National Defense Authorization Act, stating that it was because of the lack of detail regarding the provision in the bill to allow for incarceration of Americans without due process.

“I think it’s something that is so Constitutionally suspect,” Huelscamp said. “It’s one of those things, if you’re not absolutely crystal clear on a Constitutional issue like that, we shouldn’t take those chances.”

“I gather there are folks on the other side who think they covered that. I just don’t think we did a good enough job,” the Congressman added. “And based on how hard it was for Senator Paul to get an answer out of the administration, very clearly we need to make it absolutely clear that there are Constitutional protections in this country.”

The Congressman also spoke with regards to the recent and ongoing furor over the Obama administration’s intentions for using drones domestically and it’s withholding of information on it’s overseas drone program.

“One of the difficulties I have as a member of Congress is the failure of this administration to provide information on what is actually going on,” Huelscamp said.

“When we take office we sign an oath to office, but we also sign a little card that says we have access to classified military intelligence, and I’ll just tell you, this administration and prior administrations are not very clear or transparent with the folks that actually control their budget.”

“Every member of Congress should know the answers to those questions, and whether or not they can share them,” the Congressman concluded.

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

March 21, 2013 12:37 AM

CVS Pharmacy. (CBS)

SAN FRANCISCO (KPIX 5) — Pharmacy giant CVS has told workers in the Bay Area and around the nation to reveal their weight and other health information, or pay extra for health coverage.

The company announced Wednesday what it called “A Plan for Health,” that features a mix of rewards and penalties for employees.

Among the measures, employees must report their weight, body fat, cholesterol, blood pressure and blood sugar levels. Workers must also be tobacco free or enroll in an addiction program by next year.

Employees who refuse will have to pay $50 more for health coverage each month, totaling $600 a year.

In a video released by CVS, a top executive said the plan is progressive and cutting edge. “These changes aren’t just about costs, they’re about us, each of us taking personal accountability for our own health,” said Lisa Bissacia, Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer.

“(CVS Executives) better get some pretty good legal counsel and decide whether your policy is really legal, because the policy as announced is not legal,” said Richard Schramm, a Bay Area employment lawyer.

Schramm told KPIX 5 the company is trying to tell employees what they can and can’t do on their off time.

“If we granted that right to employers, employers could tell employees who to date, who to see, what kinds of foods to eat, what to drink, all kinds of behavior off site could be controlled. And that’s absolutely not the law in California,” he said.

KPIX 5 tried talking to employees at a CVS location, but they refused to comment on the plan.

Company officials said personal information is given to WebMD, and that CVS will not have access to employee’s personal health information.

Muslim nations are the only ones that practice beheadings in this day and age that I know of. Is that a coincidence or are those two facts connected?

We have a president named Barak Hussein Obama, does that mean anything in this context?

photobucket --- note: illustration is a modern guillotine, but not the one seen in the story below...

Steve, he understands the situation but he already got in trouble from this situation back then along with another guy and they were interrogated for 3 hours for simply doing there jobs.

There was actually a group of them which saw what was going on and knew something was not right, they had far too many private contractors in uniform with the same BDU’s as they had, in fact you could not tell them apart except for one colorful patch which he could not make out

They were doing a sweep operation of the base and checking the place all over when they came across an open door with some crates inside left unguarded so they went in to see what was going on.

First the guillotines:They were guarded by private contractors – not by our military – it was in 2005 at Fort Devens

The base was in the process of closing but also rebuilding at the same timeHe saw truck loads of concertina wire being hauled in and building materials too but at the same time they were shipping out the military units and closing the base, the more troops which left the more private contractors came in.

They guarded the items they would not allow the troops to see or even get near.They had about 14 crates all comprising a number of guillotines but no idea on the number of actual units; he did see and touch one of them partially assembled.

Description: STAINLESS STEEL BLADE THAT WAS VERY HEAVY DUTY AND INTERCHANGEABLE.IT WAS POWERED BY A HYDRAULIC RAM IT HAD NO CABLE OR ROPES.THE BLADE IS HOUSED IN A FRAMEWORK THAT WAS POWDER COATED BLACK.HEIGHT 7' HIGH 3.5-4 FEET WIDE.THE WRITING ON THE UNOPENED CRATES WAS ARABIC.TUNE IN TO NIGHT WITH HAGMANN AND HAGMANN --WAIT TILL YOU HEAR THE REST OF THIS EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT-ITS OTHER WORDLY!

President Barack Obama speaks during a meeting with Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny in the Oval Office of the White House, March 19, 2013. | Olivier Douliery/MC

By Anita Kumar | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama came into office four years ago skeptical of pushing the power of the White House to the limit, especially if it appeared to be circumventing Congress.

Now, as he launches his second term, Obama has grown more comfortable wielding power to try to move his own agenda forward, particularly when a deeply fractured, often-hostile Congress gets in his way.

He’s done it with a package of tools, some of which date to George Washington and some invented in the modern era of an increasingly powerful presidency. And he’s done it with a frequency that belies his original campaign criticisms of predecessor George W. Bush, invites criticisms that he’s bypassing the checks and balances of Congress and the courts, and whets the appetite of liberal activists who want him to do even more to advance their goals.

While his decision to send drones to kill U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism has garnered a torrent of criticism, his use of executive orders and other powers at home is deeper and wider.

He delayed the deportation of young illegal immigrants when Congress wouldn’t agree. He ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to research gun violence, which Congress halted nearly 15 years ago. He told the Justice Department to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act, deciding that the 1996 law defining marriage as between a man and a woman was unconstitutional. He’s vowed to act on his own if Congress didn’t pass policies to prepare for climate change.

Arguably more than any other president in modern history, he’s using executive actions, primarily orders, to bypass or pressure a Congress where the opposition Republicans can block any proposal.

“It’s gridlocked and dysfunctional. The place is a mess,” said Rena Steinzor, a law professor at the University of Maryland. “I think (executive action) is an inevitable tool given what’s happened.”

Now that Obama has showed a willingness to use those tactics, advocacy groups, supporters and even members of Congress are lobbying him to do so more and more.

The Center for Progressive Reform, a liberal advocacy group composed of law professors, including Steinzor, has pressed Obama to sign seven executive orders on health, safety and the environment during his second term.

Seventy environmental groups wrote a letter urging the president to restrict emissions at existing power plants.

Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., the chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, sent a letter to the White House asking Obama to ban federal contractors from retaliating against employees who share salary information.

Gay rights organizations recently demonstrated in front of the White House to encourage the president to sign an executive order to bar discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity by companies that have federal contracts, eager for Obama to act after nearly two decades of failed attempts to get Congress to pass a similar bill.

“It’s ridiculous that we’re having to push this hard for the president to simply pick up a pen,” said Heather Cronk, the managing director of the gay rights group GetEQUAL. “It’s reprehensible that, after signing orders on gun control, cybersecurity and all manner of other topics, the president is still laboring over this decision.”

The White House didn’t respond to repeated requests for comment.

In January, Obama said he continued to believe that legislation was “sturdier and more stable” than executive actions, but that sometimes they were necessary, such as his January directive for the federal government to research gun violence.

“There are certain issues where a judicious use of executive power can move the argument forward or solve problems that are of immediate-enough import that we can’t afford not to do it,” the former constitutional professor told The New Republic magazine.

Presidents since George Washington have signed executive orders, an oft-overlooked power not explicitly defined in the Constitution. More than half of all executive orders in the nation’s history – nearly 14,000 – have been issued since 1933.

Many serve symbolic purposes, from lowering flags to creating a new military medal. Some are used to form commissions or give federal employees a day off. Still others are more serious, and contentious: Abraham Lincoln releasing political prisoners, Franklin D. Roosevelt creating internment camps for Japanese-Americans, Dwight Eisenhower desegregating schools.

“Starting in the 20th century, we have seen more and more that have lawlike functions,” said Gene Healy, a vice president of the Cato Institute, a libertarian research center, who’s the author of “The Cult of the Presidency: America’s Dangerous Devotion to Executive Power.”

Most presidents in recent history generally have issued a few hundred orders, and hundreds more memorandums and directives.

Jimmy Carter initiated a program designed to end discrimination at colleges. Ronald Reagan overturned price controls on domestic oil production. George H.W. Bush stopped imports of some semi-automatic firearms. Bill Clinton set aside large tracts of land as national monuments. George W. Bush made it easier for religious groups to receive federal dollars.

“The expectation is that they all do this,” said Ken Mayer, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who wrote “With the Stroke of a Pen: Executive Orders and Presidential Power.” “That is the typical way of doing things.”

But, experts say, Obama’s actions are more noticeable because as a candidate he was critical of Bush’s use of power. In particular, he singled out his predecessor’s use of signing statements, documents issued when a president signs a bill that clarifies his understanding of the law.

“These last few years we’ve seen an unacceptable abuse of power at home,” Obama said in an October 2007 speech.. “We’ve paid a heavy price for having a president whose priority is expanding his own power.”

Yet Obama’s use of power echoes that of his predecessors. For example, he signed 145 executive orders in his first term, putting him on track to issue as many as the 291 that Bush did in two terms.

John Yoo, who wrote the legal opinions that supported an expansion of presidential power after the 2001 terrorist attacks, including harsh interrogation methods that some called torture, said he thought that executive orders were sometimes appropriate – when conducting internal management and implementing power given to the president by Congress or the Constitution – but he thinks that Obama has gone too far.

“I think President Obama has been as equally aggressive as President Bush, and in fact he has sometimes used the very same language to suggest that he would not obey congressional laws that intrude on his commander-in-chief power,” said Yoo, who’s now a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley. “This is utterly hypocritical, both when compared to his campaign stances and the position of his supporters in Congress, who have suddenly discovered the virtues of silence.”

Most of Obama’s actions are written statements aimed at federal agencies that are published everywhere from the White House website to the Federal Register. Some are classified and hidden from public view.

“It seems to be more calculated to prod Congress,” said Phillip J. Cooper, the author of “By Order of the President: The Use and Abuse of Executive Direct Action.” “I can’t remember a president being that consistent, direct and public.”

Bush was criticized for many of his actions on surveillance and interrogation techniques, but attention has focused on Obama’s use of actions mostly about domestic issues.

In his first two years in the White House, when fellow Democrats controlled Capitol Hill, Obama largely worked through the regular legislative process to try to achieve his domestic agenda. His biggest achievements – including a federal health care overhaul and a stimulus package designed to boost the economy –came about with little or no Republican support.

But Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in 2010, making the task of passing legislation all the more difficult for a man with a detached personality who doesn’t relish schmoozing with lawmakers. By the next year, Obama wasn’t shy about his reasons for flexing his presidential power.

In fall 2011, he launched the “We Can’t Wait” campaign, unveiling dozens of policies through executive orders – creating jobs for veterans, adopting fuel efficiency standards and stopping drug shortages – that came straight from his jobs bills that faltered in Congress.

“We’re not waiting for Congress,” Obama said in Denver that year when he announced a plan to reduce college costs. “I intend to do everything in my power right now to act on behalf of the American people, with or without Congress. We can’t wait for Congress to do its job. So where they won’t act, I will.”

When Congress killed legislation aimed at curbing the emissions that cause global warming, Obama directed the Environmental Protection Agency to write regulations on its own incorporating some parts of the bill.

When Congress defeated pro-union legislation, he had the National Labor Relations Board and the Labor Department issue rules incorporating some parts of the bill.

“The president looks more and more like a king that the Constitution was designed to replace,” Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said on the Senate floor last year.

While Republicans complain that Obama’s actions cross a line, experts say some of them are less aggressive than they appear.

After the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., in December, the White House boasted of implementing 23 executive actions to curb gun control. In reality, Obama issued a trio of modest directives that instructed federal agencies to trace guns and send information for background checks to a database.

In his State of the Union address last month, Obama instructed businesses to improve the security of computers to help prevent hacking. But he doesn’t have the legal authority to force private companies to act.

“The executive order can be a useful tool but there are only certain things he can do,” said Melanie Teplinsky, an American University law professor who’s spoken extensively on cyber-law.

Executive actions often are fleeting. They generally don’t settle a political debate, and the next president, Congress or a court may overturn them.

But congressional and legal action are rare. In 1952, the Supreme Court threw out Harry Truman’s order authorizing the seizure of steel mills during a series of strikes. In 1996, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals dismissed an order by Clinton that banned the government from contracting with companies that hire workers despite an ongoing strike.

Obama has seen some pushback.

Congress prohibited him from spending money to move inmates from the Guantanamo Bay U.S. naval base in Cuba after he signed an order that said it would close. A Chinese company sued Obama for killing its wind farm projects by executive order after he said they were too close to a military training site. A federal appeals court recently ruled that he’d exceeded his constitutional powers when he named several people to the National Labor Relations Board while the Senate was in recess.